Why should you decide how someone who brought you to a retailer gets paid by that retailer? You have nothing to do with that relationship or their arrangement.

Again... I get to decide simply because I can. Because it's within my power and it breaks no rules, ToS's, or laws to do so. It's not my fault that third parties can disrupt the arrangement you have with Amazon by simply changing a URL, or installing software to block cookies.

Because it's this pigeon's spend which may "reward" you all out of proportion for posting a link to a free book. In my world, I get to decide who I fatten up and how.

Ghostery is amazing !!!

If you were paying extra for using an affiliate link, I'd agree. But you're not. The affiliate's cut comes out of Amazon's money, not yours. It's up to you, and only you, to decide how to spend your money. Why is not up to Amazon, and only Amazon, to decide how to spen their money?

Are all the sites that list free books Amazon affiliates? I had a look on the eReaderIQ website but can't see anything that states they do this?

I should add, like some others have said, I'm perfectly happy to use affiliate links and support websites I frequent if they have them, but although I can understand why the free book sites want them, it does seem very underhand to me.

I use a money saving website that makes it clear on every single link whether or not it's one that earns them any money. That's how it should be done.

Amazon wants one thing over all. Traffic. They made the decision long ago to reward based on traffic, by using the indirect referral method.

If Amazon wants traffic so bad, why is it changing its affiliate program policy, which has all of you so upset? Sounds to me like Amazon is trying to stop some sort of abuse. As I said before, I hope that the program is further modified to only give commission for the first click-through.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalandar

I'd like to see browser makers disable the ability of mods like this, or at least require them to expose themselves so that content providers can decide whether they want this traffic or not.

I'd like to see browser makers disable the ability of mods like this, or at least require them to expose themselves so that content providers can decide whether they want this traffic or not.

This capability already exists for adblockers, I imagine such detection would be similar for other related extensions.

It comes down to this - it is up to ME which business I choose to support. My Adblock is turned on by default. If I come across a site that I want to continue using, I will exempt it from Adblock and let the ads through. They have to give me something I want before making money off of me.

Too often, affiliate links are located on bogus content marketing blogs that serve no purpose other than getting people to click those links. They foul up search results because, on the surface, they look like relevant matches but they often provide completely inaccurate information and are nothing but advertisements pretending to be objective sources of information.

People end up there, and even if they see the info is no good, they may still click the link to Amazon or some other site because they can see that it starts with the proper address - it is going to a known site. They don't know that it's an affiliate link because there's usually no disclosure, and the don't know that the site that gave them no useful info whatsoever is going to profit from them if they buy anything in the next 24 hours.

It doesn't matter WHERE the money is coming from - that site is profiting without providing a service.

I have absolutely no problem with affiliates that DO provide a service I'm interested in, and I was happy to support them right up to the point where doing so means I have to hunt cookies.

eReaderIQ.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.

Are all the sites that list free books Amazon affiliates? I had a look on the eReaderIQ website but can't see anything that states they do this?

I should add, like some others have said, I'm perfectly happy to use affiliate links and support websites I frequent if they have them, but although I can understand why the free book sites want them, it does seem very underhand to me.

I use a money saving website that makes it clear on every single link whether or not it's one that earns them any money. That's how it should be done.

EreaderIQ's affiliate disclaimer is on their 'About' page, which you can find at the bottom of their homepage.

It doesn't matter WHERE the money is coming from - that site is profiting without providing a service.

But they are providing a service. To Amazon. And Amazon is rewarding them for that service.

I personally have no problems with how the affiliate program works. If Amazon wants to give an affiliate a cut of their profit even 24 hours after the fact, that's fine with me. I also realize that not everyone feels the same way I do about it, so a program like Ghostery sounds like a great option.